Flypaperhttp://edexcellence.net/taxonomy/term/13/all
enUsing equity reports to drive school improvement in D.C.http://edexcellence.net/articles/using-equity-reports-to-drive-school-improvement-in-dc
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>Using equity reports to drive school improvement in D.C.</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-ext-author-name field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Scott Pearson</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">March 02, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>When we talk about high standards, accountability, and school choice, one essential element is often overlooked: giving parents and education leaders information they can actually use. It’s one thing to produce data, but quite another to make it useful—easily understood, comparable, and actionable.</p>
<p>The District of Columbia has reaffirmed its commitment to making good data available in its second annual publication of <a href="http://www.dcpcsb.org/report/school-equity-reports-0">Equity Reports</a>. These reports provide unprecedented levels of information on how well each public and public charter school in the District of Columbia serves all students. By providing apples-to-apples comparisons of schools and presenting the results in a format that is easy to understand, the reports signal potential problems, help school leaders focus on areas where schools need to improve, and guide parents as they make decisions about their child’s education.</p>
<p>This is an important step in addressing some of the most critical issues about equity in public education: How successfully are we closing the achievement gap between black and white students, and between low-income and more affluent students? Are we suspending children of color at higher rates than white students? How well are we serving students with disabilities? These data will lead to tough and important conversations at schools and around the District as we dig into the underlying causes of the results we now are able to see.</p>
<p>Moreover, our Equity Reports tackle perennial charter school pain points head-on: Do charter schools push students out mid-year? Do they accept students all year, in all grades? Are charter schools serving fewer special needs students? Addressing these issues is particularly important in a city where charters now serve 44 percent of students.</p>
<p>Having learned about the concept from our friends in New Orleans, the D.C. Public Charter School Board (PCSB)—the sole authorizer of charter schools in the District—introduced Equity Reports here. Leaders in D.C. Public Schools and in the city government embraced the idea and, together, we have made it a district-wide effort. But writing a report must also galvanize action that leads to policy changes. Among the findings:</p>
<p><strong>Transparency surrounding difficult issues leads schools to improve their performance</strong> <strong>without resorting to additional regulation</strong><strong>.</strong> Each charter school has its own independent board whose members historically have relied on their school leadership to tell them how things are going. Now board members can see, for example, that English learners had far lower academic growth than the school as a whole, or that the school suspended students with disabilities at three times the rate of other students. Schools use this data to prioritize these issues, and their responsiveness produces results. Many schools, for example, have instituted restorative justice programs to reduce suspensions and expulsions. Since we have begun publicizing equity data, expulsions in charter schools have been halved, and suspensions are down 20 percent.</p>
<p><strong>Equity Reports dispel charter myths.</strong> It was “common knowledge” that charter schools didn’t serve the highest-needs special needs students; this data shows otherwise. Charter schools serve the highest-needs special needs students at slightly higher levels than traditional public schools. And everyone “knew” that charter schools suspended too many children. But again, these reports show overall suspension rates for black and low-income children are below city averages. Then there was the persistent myth that charter schools forced children out right before statewide testing. Now that we show withdrawals month by month for each school, everyone can see that this does not occur in any D.C. charter school.</p>
<p><img class="media-element file-default" typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Slide1.jpg" alt="" /></p>
<p><strong>Equity reports provide parents more information to help them make the right school for their child.</strong> That’s important in D.C., which is <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/2015/ecci_2014">one of the five top cities for school choice</a>. Parents can only make good choices when they have good information, and our equity reports provide the most thorough and accessible information about school performance and climate anywhere in the country.</p>
<p><strong>The day-to-day work that went into producing the Equity Reports led charter and traditional public schools to work closely together, solving problems and harmonizing data collection</strong>. For example, we learned that DCPS counted a student as present using different rules than charters, and we made the rules uniform. We agreed that in-seat attendance (which ignores whether or not a student has an excuse) was a better predictor of student success than truancy rate (which only counts unexcused absences). That kind of collaboration helps build bridges between charters and traditional public schools; it drives progress for the benefit of all children.</p>
<p>D.C.’s Equity Reports are promoting transparency, equity, autonomy, and choice by providing unprecedented data about school performance and making it easy for all to see and compare. LEAs, school districts, and charter authorizers ought to take a look at D.C.’s equity reports and consider whether their local parents and education leaders would benefit from having similar clarity about their own schools. Any school district seeking to drive improvement through school autonomy would do well to consider this approach.</p>
<p><em>Scott Pearson is the executive director of the D.C. Public Charter School Board. The board is responsible for academic achievement for the 112 public charter schools in Washington, D.C</em>. </p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 17:30:03 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58129 at http://edexcellence.netFour ideas for Montgomery County Public Schoolshttp://edexcellence.net/articles/four-ideas-for-montgomery-county-public-schools
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>Four ideas for Montgomery County Public Schools</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/michael-j-petrilli">Michael J. Petrilli</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">March 02, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The sudden <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/montgomery-county-schools-superintendent-to-step-down/2015/02/03/8f7fd8b6-ab0c-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html" title="www.washingtonpost.com">departure of Joshua Starr</a>, superintendent of Montgomery County Public Schools, caught many by surprise—including Starr. That’s a depressing sign of a dysfunctional school board, one whose members failed to signal serious concerns with their superintendent, even as recently as last fall’s school board elections.</p>
<p>If the board has any hope of recruiting a talented new leader for MCPS, <a href="http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/about/20141208AtAGlance.pdf" title="www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org">among the largest districts in the country with more than 153,000 students</a>, it needs to be crystal-clear about the direction it wants the system to take. As an MCPS parent and incorrigible education reformer, let me offer a few suggestions.</p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13.0080003738403px; line-height: 1.538em;">First, </span><span style="font-size: 13.0080003738403px; line-height: 20.0063037872314px;">MCPS</span><span style="font-size: 13.0080003738403px; line-height: 20.0063037872314px;"> needs to r</span><span style="font-size: 13.0080003738403px; line-height: 1.538em;">ecommit to its core mission: dramatically </span><a href="http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/OLO/Resources/Files/OLO%20Report%202014-7%20Final.pdf" style="font-size: 13.0080003738403px; line-height: 1.538em;" title="www.montgomerycountymd.gov">raising student achievement</a><span style="font-size: 13.0080003738403px; line-height: 1.538em;">. As Starr’s struggles with the board burst into public view, he made a last-ditch effort to convince its members, and MCPS’s many ardent constituents, of his commitment to narrowing the achievement gaps between poor and minority students and white and Asian students. I don’t doubt his sincerity. But the achievement gap is measured primarily by test scores, and Starr made his name by </span><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2012/12/10/moco-schools-chief-calls-for-three-year-moratorium-on-standardized-testing/" style="font-size: 13.0080003738403px; line-height: 1.538em;" title="www.washingtonpost.com">speaking out against tests</a><span style="font-size: 13.0080003738403px; line-height: 1.538em;">. At the least, he sent a mixed message about his commitment to academic achievement.</span></p>
<p>It’s not entirely fair to blame him for that. Starr was hired in part because he represented a change in style and approach from his hard-charging predecessor Jerry Weast, who was obsessed with <a href="http://www.hunt-institute.org/elements/media/files/DYK_Number_7.pdf" title="www.hunt-institute.org">boosting achievement among the county’s growing number of poor and minority students</a>. Weast’s single-minded focus came to be seen as tyrannical and, perhaps, negligent of the needs and priorities of the rest of the county. But there are signs that his forceful changes paid off, in higher test scores and especially in significant recent gains in the graduation rate.</p>
<p>Many of us would welcome a return to Weast’s “obsession” with achievement (countywide, this time, and without the tyranny). If that’s what this board wants, it should say so.</p>
<p>Next, the district should send a clear message: <a href="http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/council/Resources/Files/agenda/cm/2014/140714/20140714_ED1.pdf" title="www.montgomerycountymd.gov">Achievement is for everybody</a>. The county’s poor, minority, and immigrant populations deserve special attention since they tend to underperform on almost every measure of academic achievement. But that can’t be an excuse to ignore MCPS’s white, Asian, and ­middle class students. The goal of any great school system should be to fulfill the learning potential of all students. MCPS, then, has to walk and chew gum at the same time. It has to work to escalate the performance of poor kids while giving all kids great opportunities to make significant progress every day.</p>
<p>A particular challenge is ensuring that the county’s high achievers have that opportunity. MCPS has a good start with its “centers for the highly gifted” for fourth- and fifth-graders and its magnet middle and high schools, but it could use more, plus a commitment to give high achievers the acceleration they deserve.</p>
<p>My next recommendation is just as important: Don’t pretend that college is the only worthwhile aspiration for students. Like many education systems, MCPS is myopic in its focus on college prep. This goes back at least to Weast’s “<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2012/10/26/why-mcps-seven-keys-to-college-readiness-should-be-tossed/" title="www.washingtonpost.com">Seven Keys to College Readiness</a>” campaign. Getting a large proportion of students ready for college should be the goal of MCPS and other great districts. It’s also what huge numbers of county residents expect for their kids. But college should mean more than four-year degrees, and Montgomery County has some serious work to do in this regard.</p>
<p>The most successful technical training programs tend to start in high school, in stand-alone career and technical education schools or in career academies within traditional, comprehensive schools. The best of these programs have a strong record of engaging teenagers through hands-on, relevant learning and site-based apprenticeships. This well-traveled path can lead students into postsecondary education, typically at a community college where they can earn an associate’s degree or certifications. Yet fewer than <a href="http://www.mdreportcard.org/HighSchoolCompletionOther.aspx?PV=38:12:15:AAAA:3:N:0:13:1:2:1:1:1:2:3" title="www.mdreportcard.org">5 percent of Montgomery County’s forty thousand</a> high school students are engaged in a significant way in career or technical education. That’s outrageous.</p>
<p>Finally, Starr's successor should embrace <a href="http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/schools/nec/choice/detail.aspx" title="www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org">school choice</a>. One of Starr’s smarter decisions was to launch a commission to study the county’s school choice programs. That’s worth continuing, at least if the goal is to expand MCPS’s offerings. Demand for these specialized schools far outstrips supply, and adding many more can be an effective strategy for dealing with the system’s crowding challenges.</p>
<p>Because of strong growth, MCPS schools are bursting at the seams. But especially in the county’s more affluent areas, parents are loath to allow new schools and the redrawing of school boundaries. There’s an obvious solution: Add more schools of choice in those areas.</p>
<p>If MCPS itself won’t embrace more school choice, it had better watch out, because Republican Governor Larry Hogan would like to empower the State Board of Education to create charter schools across Maryland. That would provide a healthy nudge to get the system to act.</p>
<p>Some members of the Montgomery school board will disagree with at least some of my suggestions. So be it. But tell us where you stand, what you want the system to achieve and what you seek in a new leader. Don’t let it be just about “personality” or “tone” or “working style.” Make it about the vision for the county and its schools. Mostly: Make it clear.</p>
<p><em>Editor's note: This post <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whats-the-core-mission-of-montgomery-county-schools/2015/02/27/a29c3a76-b6b9-11e4-aa05-1ce812b3fdd2_story.html">originally appeared in a slightly different form</a> in the </em>Washington Post</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 16:37:33 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58128 at http://edexcellence.netLife lessonshttp://edexcellence.net/articles/life-lessons
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>Life lessons</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-ext-author-name field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Peter Sipe</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">March 02, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>I’ve always liked Fridays as much as the next guy, but this year I especially like them: Every Friday, my students and I read an obituary together. If that sounds morbid, let me tell you what I tell the kids: An obituary is the story of a life; death is just the detail that gets it printed.</p>
<p>How do I select the weekly life story we read? I don’t. I have other people do it for me. I’ve been asking folks around town—elected officials, businesspeople, civic leaders, colleagues, and friends—this question: If you could pick one person from the past whom you wish kids would learn about in school, who would it be?</p>
<p>With their introductions, we’ve made the acquaintance of Phyllis Jen, a beloved family doctor, Ruth Batson, a civil rights activist who helped desegregate our schools, and Tom White, a businessman who gave away his riches to the poor. In upcoming weeks, we’ll be reading about a firefighter, a judge, and a rowing coach. And I’ve got lots more in my pile, all marvelously interesting—and inspiring. It’s embarrassing to admit that I’d never heard of most of these people before, but I’m glad to have finally met them. And I’m very pleased to introduce them to my students.</p>
<p>For a teacher, obituaries are useful classroom texts. They offer short history lessons, excellent vocabulary (for example, “ephemeral” and “posterity”), and align well with the new Common Core standards. But the greatest value of the obituaries we read is this: They’re fine examples of how to live. We’re not merely reading life stories, we’re learning about lives worthy of emulation. By the end of the year, my students and I will have met dozens of excellent role models.</p>
<p>Susan Cain, author of the book <em>Quiet</em>, observes that instruction in America used to promote a culture of character in which “what was important was the good deeds that you performed when nobody was looking.” Now, she believes, we’ve developed a culture of personality in which…well, I don’t know who the next celebrity will be, but I’ll bet my next paycheck whoever it is won’t have achieved fame by quietly performing good deeds.</p>
<p>Too often, those who deserve our admiration—and our emulation—remain unsung. It doesn’t have to be this way. Obituaries provide character education with real characters. These good men and women were part of our communities, and if you ask to be introduced, you can meet them. Their obituaries present life stories of those who lived well, who did good deeds, and who offer virtuous examples to follow. By making the passed present, we don’t just honor these fine citizens. We do our civic duty.</p>
<p><em>Peter Sipe is a sixth-grade teacher at Boston Collegiate Charter School. See his previous </em>Flypaper <em>editorials, "<a href="http://edexcellence.net/articles/at-ed-schools-a-low-degree-of-difficulty">At ed schools, a low degree of difficulty</a>" and "<a href="http://edexcellence.net/articles/how-to-challenge-voracious-young-readers">How to challenge voracious young readers</a>." </em></p>
<p><em>Editor's note: This post <a href="http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/opinion/op_ed/2015/02/sipe_obituaries_teach_life_s_lessons">originally appeared in a slightly different form</a> in the </em>Boston Herald<em>.</em></p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 15:20:11 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58126 at http://edexcellence.netMarriage as a springboard to the middle classhttp://edexcellence.net/articles/marriage-as-a-springboard-to-the-middle-class
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>Marriage as a springboard to the middle class</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/michael-j-petrilli">Michael J. Petrilli</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 27, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p style="text-align: center;"><img class="media-element file-default" typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/ednext_XV_2_petrilli_img01.jpg" alt="" /></p>
<p>Regular followers of Fordham know that, over the past few years, I’ve been thinking and writing a lot about “education for upward mobility,” starting with a <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2013/05/Petrilli_to_Meier_on_opportunity_gap.html">series</a> <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2013/10/the_especially_deserving_poor.html">of</a> <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2013/09/self-sufficient_citizens_publi.html">posts</a> <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2013/10/how_to_fight_poverty_and_win.html">on</a> Deborah Meier’s <em>Bridging Differences</em> blog and culminating in last December’s <a href="http://edexcellence.net/publications/education-for-upward-mobility">conference</a> on the subject. Now I’ve got a new essay in <em>Education Next</em>, “<a href="http://educationnext.org/schools-address-americas-marriage-crisis-careers/">How Can Schools Address America’s Marriage Crisis?</a>,” which touches on many of the issues that I’m afraid education reformers have tended (or opted) to overlook.</p>
<p>A consistent theme throughout this work is that we’re <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/life/education/2014/03/college_isn_t_for_everyone_let_s_stop_pretending_it_is.html">too myopically focused on college</a> (and generally on the traditional four-year college degree) as <em>the only route</em> to upward mobility for America’s poor children. I’m ready to concede that it <em>is</em> a pretty darn good pathway, at least for students <a href="http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Kelly%20Paper-KLM%20%281%29.pdf">who actually complete a postsecondary credential</a>. And many of you have helped me to understand that colleges don’t simply “bestow a credential on those most likely to succeed,” as I <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414133/scott-walker-doesnt-need-degree-and-neither-do-you-michael-j-petrilli">argued</a> a week ago. There’s some <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/27/the-tuition-is-too-damn-high-part-ii-why-college-is-still-worth-it/">pretty compelling evidence</a> that the college experience itself adds real value, which partly explains the stronger life outcomes for graduates.</p>
<p>What I’m not ready to concede is the larger point: Our focus on college is still too narrow because it overlooks other critically important steps on the ladder to the middle class.</p>
<p>As I explain in <em>Education Next</em>, a more holistic approach would also take seriously what Isabel Sawhill and Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution call the “success sequence”: get at least a high school diploma, work full time, and wait till you are at least twenty-one and married before having children. They estimate that 98 percent of individuals who follow those three norms will not be poor, and almost three-quarters will be solidly middle class. On the flip side, three-quarters of young people who fail to follow any of those norms will be poor, and almost none will be middle class.</p>
<p>So let’s focus on the education part of that sequence—and yes, more education is better than less. But let’s not ignore the “work-full-time” and “don’t-have-children-too-young-or-out-of-wedlock” parts either.</p>
<p>What can schools do about those?</p>
<ul><li>Boost the employment prospects of disadvantaged youth via high-quality career and technical education programs</li>
<li>Help their students develop “performance character”—particularly drive and prudence</li>
<li>Offer a full suite of well-organized extracurricular activities (to help build those all-important non-cognitive skills and to keep kids off the streets)</li>
<li>Most importantly, give their students a sense of hope and purpose</li>
</ul><p>College is a great springboard to the middle class. So is saving parenthood until marriage. Let’s make sure we’re focused on both strategies instead of just one. </p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Fri, 27 Feb 2015 18:32:17 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58124 at http://edexcellence.netMemo to teachers' unions: Now might be a good time to start panickinghttp://edexcellence.net/articles/memo-to-teachers-unions-now-might-be-a-good-time-to-start-panicking
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>Memo to teachers&#039; unions: Now might be a good time to start panicking</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-ext-author-name field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Joshua Dunn</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 26, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>In “<a href="http://educationnext.org/collective-panic/">Collective Panic</a>,” Martha Derthick and I argued that teachers’ unions dodged a major blow in <em>Harris v. Quinn </em>(2014) but that they should hold off on popping the champagne.</p>
<p>The court’s decision in <em>Quinn</em> indicated that a prized precedent, <em>Abood v. Detroit Board of Education</em> (1977), might soon be overturned. Under <em>Abood</em>, public sector unions could collect “agency fees” from nonmembers, but those funds could not be used for ideological or political purposes. The logic of <em>Abood</em> was that unless public sector unions could collect those funds by compulsion, nonmembers would “free ride” on the collective bargaining efforts of the unions.</p>
<p>Some have always questioned this logic. It’s not free riding if you never wanted the ride. It’s more like being clubbed in the head, tied up, and thrown in the trunk. Regardless, without the ability to punish these potential free riders, union membership would collapse. As <a href="http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_67.htm">Daniel DiSalvo has noted</a>, “In nearly every state that permits agency fees, more than 90 percent of teachers belong to unions. In states that don’t allow agency fees, only 68 percent of teachers are unionized.” Since agency fees cost nearly as much as a full union membership, individuals see little reason not to join the union. Losing <em>Abood</em> would be a “<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/supreme-court-ruling-spares-most-unions-only-temporarily">crippling blow</a>” for public sector unions.</p>
<p>In <em>Quinn</em>, Justice Alito argued that <em>Abood</em> created an “anomaly” that at best rested uneasily with First Amendment principles. Because public sector unions are public, all of their bargaining is political. Negotiating with the government means negotiating with taxpayers’ representatives. Thus, it is specious to draw a line between ideological activities and bargaining over wages and benefits. Compelling individuals to pay for the latter means compelling them to pay for speech that they oppose. Citing previous precedent, Alito said that “free-rider arguments…are generally insufficient to overcome First Amend­ment objections.” In all, Alito spent nearly four pages critiquing <em>Abood</em>, making it obvious to sentient readers that the majority would like the opportunity to overturn it. It just needed the right case. The employees in Quinn were home health care contractors, not “full-fledged” state employees.</p>
<p>As Martha and I pointed out, such a case was already making its way through the lower courts. Now that case, <em>Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association</em> (CTA), has been appealed to the Supreme Court, increasing the odds that <em>Abood</em>’s days are numbered.</p>
<p>In <em>Friedrichs</em>, ten California teachers are arguing that agency fees (combined with onerous “opt-out” procedures) violate their rights to freedom of speech and association. In <a href="https://www.cir-usa.org/legal_docs/friedrichs_v_cta_cert_pet.pdf">their petition for <em>certiorari</em></a>, the teachers contend that “public-sector collective bargaining constitutes core political speech about governmental affairs that is not materially different from lobbying.” California’s fiscal train wreck makes that all the more obvious. With unfunded public pension liabilities of more than $198 billion, choices over compensation and benefits are profoundly political affecting the long-term financial viability of the state. Additionally, in order to receive a refund of the 30 percent of their dues that even the CTA acknowledges is used for explicitly political activity, teachers have to file a written annual request during a narrow window. Teachers, therefore, cannot permanently opt out. And if they forget to file a written request, their money goes to lobbying and campaigning. Since 2000, the CTA has spent more than $200 million on political activity, with their largest expenditures going to opposition against educational reform initiatives.</p>
<p>While the court could always deny <em>cert</em>, right now <em>Friedrichs</em> looks like a case delivered straight from central casting. For unions, it looks like a machete-wielding monster. For education reformers, it looks like Clint Eastwood in <em>Pale Rider</em>. Regardless, teachers’ unions would be justified in worrying that their days of compelling contributions from alleged free riders are numbered.</p>
<p><em>Joshua Dunn is an associate professor of political science at the University of Colorado–Colorado Springs and the co-author of </em>Education Next<em>’s </em>Legal Beat<em> column.</em></p>
<p><em>Editor's note: This post <a href="http://educationnext.org/memo-teachers-unions-now-might-good-time-start-panicking/">originally appeared in a slightly different form</a> at </em>Education Next.</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 20:52:29 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58122 at http://edexcellence.netThe state-led ESEA compromisehttp://edexcellence.net/articles/the-state-led-esea-compromise
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>The state-led ESEA compromise</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/andy-smarick">Andy Smarick</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 26, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>A few weeks ago, I used a <a href="http://edexcellence.net/articles/understanding-the-federal-accountability-spectra">graphic to show the four dimensions of federal accountability</a>, each of which has a range of options. I then used this <a href="http://edexcellence.net/articles/esea-testing-proposals-in-one-picture">graphic to show the consensus for preserving NCLB testing</a>.</p>
<p>Here I used it to show how eleven major ESEA reauthorization proposals address the other dimensions (<a href="http://blog.bellwethereducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Screen-Shot-2015-02-17-at-4.33.35-PM.png">remember</a>, minimum federal accountability is on the left; maximum on the right). The total picture is <a href="http://diagrams.org/images/png/large/f00022.html">as confusing as subway map</a>.</p>
<p><img style="font-size: 13.0080003738403px; line-height: 1.538em;" class="media-element file-default" typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/New%20Smarick%20graphic.png" alt="" /></p>
<p>But when broken down, the graphic reveals three distinct approaches, one of which offers the best chance at reauthorization.</p>
<p><strong>Federal Prescription </strong></p>
<p>Several proposals that appeared in the testing-alone graphic do not appear here because they didn’t take clear positions on the dimensions beyond testing. Of those remaining, four embrace what I call Federal Prescription. Their underlying logic is: If we want states, districts, and schools to get better results, the feds must tell them what to do.</p>
<p>NCLB is current law and represents the most expansive federal role on the table. It mandates and specifies performance targets (100 percent proficiency, Adequate Yearly Progress, etc.); creates mandatory, specified performance categories (“in need of improvement,” “restructuring,” etc.); and spells out the activities required for struggling schools.</p>
<p><img class="media-element file-default" typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/New%20Smarick%20graphic2.png" alt="" /></p>
<p>The <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/DSub%20to%20HR5%20Summary%20FINAL.pdf">plan offered by House Democrats</a> was similar. It would’ve required states to set performance targets for all students. States would’ve been required to identify “schools in need of support” and “high-priority schools,” and the interventions for both would’ve been prescribed. Although the waivers provided more flexibility, states still had to develop an array of targets; identify (federally defined) priority, focus, and reward schools; and follow a prescribed set of interventions.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://edtrust.org/press_release/more-than-20-civil-rights-groups-and-education-advocates-release-principles-for-esea-reauthorization-the-federal-role-must-be-honored-and-maintained/">Ed Trust</a> proposal would also require achievement targets for districts, schools, and student subgroups. It would require state accountability systems to designate schools and districts based on their performance against these targets (so there would be a bit more flexibility than NCLB or waivers). It would give states considerably more leeway over interventions, but the <a href="http://www.edtrust.org/sites/edtrust.org/files/publications/files/ESEACoreCoalitionLetter.pdf">federal government would still play a prominent role</a>: the education secretary would approve state plans, enforce implementation, and “take action” if goals weren’t met.</p>
<p><strong>Federal Transparency</strong></p>
<p>On the other end of the spectra are the plans that believe the federal government should make information publicly available and then hand back everything else to the states. This is federal accountability through transparency.</p>
<p><img class="media-element file-default" typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/New%20Smarick%20graphic3.png" alt="" /></p>
<p>Though Alexander “A” and “B” differ on testing, they are the same in the other aspects. The <a href="http://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/AEG15033.pdf">language</a> has no requirements for performance targets. States would have to identify schools needing improvement, but there are no requirements for how those schools would be identified or how many there would be—and there are no other required categories. The education secretary would be <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2015/01/alexander_draft_NCLB_offers_lawmake.html">prohibited from influencing</a> these decisions. States would have to do something with struggling schools, but such decisions would be theirs alone.</p>
<p><a href="http://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/the_student_success_act_summary_2015_for_introduction.pdf">The House bill</a> also requires no performance targets and allows states to make all intervention decisions. It requires only one category of schools. <em>Politics K-12</em> <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2015/02/kline_introduces_bill_to_rewri.html">wrote</a>, “It pretty much lets states do what they want on accountability.”</p>
<p>The <a href="http://excelined.org/principles-2015-reauthorization-elementary-secondary-education-act/">Foundation for Excellence in Education</a> proposal is very<a href="file:///C:/Users/Kevin/Downloads/Foundation%20for%20Excellence%20in%20Education"> similar</a>. It doesn’t mention performance targets. It has no requirement for designations (it supports <em>allowing </em>states to categorize), though it implies that states would designate some low-performing schools. States would have full control over interventions. It would prohibit the education secretary from influencing accountability systems.</p>
<p><strong>Accountability for Results</strong></p>
<p>The best chance for ESEA reauthorization can be found in the approach taken by the nation’s governors, legislatures, and state superintendents. Their proposals, which I have labeled Accountability for Results, hew to one of the key principles of management and leadership—and the heart of the charter school bargain: Set clear goals and give people the freedom to reach them.</p>
<p>States would set performance targets but then have wide latitude in designing school categories and interventions. In other words, <a href="http://edexcellence.net/commentary/education-gadfly-weekly/2011/september-29/obamaflex-too-much-tight.html">tight on ends, loose on means</a>.</p>
<p><img class="media-element file-default" typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/New%20Smarick%20graphic4.png" alt="" /></p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/2015/ESEAGovernorsAndStateLegislaturesPlan.pdf">NGA/NCSL proposal</a> would require short- and long-term goals at the state and student subgroup level. It would require annual determinations for district and school progress toward meeting those goals. It would require interventions for underperformance. It would prohibit the education secretary from controlling these state systems. Similarly, CCSSO’s <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/ESEA%20Key%20Provisions%20-%20FINAL.pdf">proposal</a> would require <a href="http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2011/Roadmap_for_Next-Generation_Accountability_2011.pdf">performance targets</a> and annual school and district determinations. It would also require interventions (and rewards), but it <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2015/01/ccsso_to_congress_keep_annual_.html">would leave the details up to the states</a>.</p>
<p>The Bush Institute recommends the same <a href="http://www.bushcenter.org/blog/2015/02/13/accountability-principles">approach</a>. It would require statewide and gap-closing goals that are then translated into performance targets for districts, schools, and student subgroups. It would require designations related to reaching and not reaching targets. Interventions would be required, but the details would be up to the states.</p>
<p><strong>The Compromise</strong></p>
<p>It’s essential to underscore that the very state leaders who will be responsible for leading the post-NCLB era are the ones recommending Accountability for Results. Moreover, this compromise keeps faith with those demanding we give K–12 authority back to the states and those demanding we continue protecting disadvantaged kids. It would merely require the Right to agree to include explicit performance targets and the Left to agree to give states greater flexibility in tackling challenges.</p>
<p>Important details would still need to be worked out (e.g., the role of the education secretary in approving state plans, the consequences for a state’s failure to improve results).</p>
<p>But state leaders may have shown us the path to reauthorization.</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 12:16:28 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58120 at http://edexcellence.netSpinning Straw into Goldhttp://edexcellence.net/articles/spinning-straw-into-gold
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>Spinning Straw into Gold</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/ellen-alpaugh">Ellen Alpaugh</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 25, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>According to this Education Resource Strategies report, State Education Agencies (SEAs) possess “a gold mine of untapped material”—vast amounts of school and district data collected annually. This information is currently used for accountability purposes or to inform research and policy, but the report calls for what may be an even more important data deployment to inform local decisions that could potentially help schools make the most of limited resources. For example, Maryville Middle School in Tennessee used value-added performance data on teacher effectiveness to match educator strengths with student needs. The result? Maryville has repeatedly outperformed all other schools in the state on student growth measures</p>
<p>A good example, yet it’s also a fact that raw data alone are not too useful. Helpfully, the report offers several ways in which SEAs can make this information more actionable for local education agencies. They can, for example, create their own analyses providing feedback on allocations of people, time, and money. Such analyses should examine the connection between resources and student achievement so schools and districts can deploy the most effective or relevant resources to the students who need them most.</p>
<p>Besides such sensible (if obvious) recommendations, this report serves to highlight what well-designed data systems can do. If we want to make the most of the resources within our current K–12 systems, data may be the most powerful tool we have.</p>
<p>SOURCE: Stephen Frank and Joseph Trawick-Smith, “<a href="http://www.erstrategies.org/library/spinning_straw_into_gold?utm_source=Spinning+Straw+into+Gold+Release&amp;utm_campaign=Rescheduled+SBB+Webinar+%2864+contacts%29&amp;utm_medium=email">Spinning Straw into Gold: How state education agencies can transform their data to improve critical school resource decisions</a>,” Education Resource Strategies (December 2014).</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 19:45:43 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58117 at http://edexcellence.netSchool Closings in Chicago: Understanding Families' Choices and Constraints for New School Enrollmenthttp://edexcellence.net/articles/school-closings-in-chicago-understanding-families-choices-and-constraints-for-new-school
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>School Closings in Chicago: Understanding Families&#039; Choices and Constraints for New School Enrollment</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/aaron-churchill">Aaron Churchill </a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 25, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Faced with enormous budgetary shortfalls, the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) opted in May 2013 to close forty-seven schools, one of the largest instances of school closures in U.S. history. CPS then set about relocating more than ten thousand displaced students into higher-performing schools for the 2013–14 year. The district called the schools that absorbed the transplanted pupils “welcoming schools.” The policy was supported by <a href="https://ccsr.uchicago.edu/publications/when-schools-close-effects-displaced-students-chicago-public-schools">research</a> showing that students affected by closure benefit academically if they land in a better school. The welcoming schools were all higher-performing on CPS’s internal measures of performance; they also received additional resources to ease the influx of new students (e.g., pupil safety and instructional supports). So how did the policy play out? According to University of Chicago analysts, 66 percent of displaced students enrolled in their designated “welcoming school” in fall 2013, while 25 percent attended other neighborhood-based CPS schools, 4 percent enrolled in charters and a similar number in magnets. An analysis of student records indicates that distance from home, building safety concerns, and residential mobility were all significant reasons why one-third of the total went somewhere other than their welcoming school. Interesting, to be sure, but the study does not report anything about the academic results for CPS students in their new schools. (Stay tuned for a new Fordham study of how Ohio students fare after closure.) Overall, CPS crafted a reasonable though not perfectly implemented policy for reassigning students to better schools. While few places are apt to shutter schools on the scale of CPS, they could learn from Chicago’s experience—and perhaps improve upon it.</p>
<p>SOURCE: Marisa de la Torre, et al., “<a href="http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/publications/school-closings-chicago-understanding-families-choices-and-constraints-new-school"><em>School Closings in Chicago: Understanding Families’ Choices and Constraints for New School Enrollment</em></a>,” University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research (January 2015).</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 19:43:38 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58116 at http://edexcellence.netLife in the Fast Lane: Effects of Early Grade Acceleration on High School and College Outcomeshttp://edexcellence.net/articles/life-in-the-fast-lane-effects-of-early-grade-acceleration-on-high-school-and-college
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>Life in the Fast Lane: Effects of Early Grade Acceleration on High School and College Outcomes</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/amber-m-northern-phd">Amber M. Northern, Ph.D.</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 25, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>A new study published in the latest issue of <em>Gifted Education Quarterly</em> examines the long-term impact on young students of skipping a grade (also known as acceleration) on subsequent academic outcomes. Analysts used the National Education Longitudinal Study database (NELS) to begin tracking a representative cohort of eighth-grade students in 1988, then follow them through high school and again two and eight years post-high school (i.e., through 2000). A variety of outcome data were collected, including PSAT, SAT, and ACT scores, students’ GPAs, and college aspirations—as well as college measures, such as the selectivity of the institution, GPA for each college year, and degree attainment. All students who had ever skipped at least one grade prior to eighth grade comprised the acceleration group. Thus, the sample included kids who ranged from age nine to age thirteen while in eighth grade (the mean age was 12.7). Those students were then matched with a set of older, non-accelerated, same-grade peers from NELS based on gender, race, SES, and eighth-grade achievement. The accelerated and non-accelerated groups were nearly identical on these variables.</p>
<p>The study found that accelerated students scored significantly higher on the math sections of the PSAT, SAT, and most of the ACT and earned higher grades in high school. They also took more advanced courses and more often participated in additional educational opportunities. Once in college, they earned higher grades during their second year and overall. (Among the few similarities was that both groups were admitted to similarly selective colleges, and both had similar rates of graduate degree completion, although accelerated kids were slightly more likely to attain a bachelor’s degree.) More advanced students, of course, are also likelier to be more self-motivated in general, which may explain their better performance on most measures. Nevertheless, accelerated kids keep doing things to help them accelerate. We should applaud and encourage that.</p>
<p>SOURCE: Katie Larsen McClarty, "<a href="http://gcq.sagepub.com/content/59/1/3.abstract" target="_blank">Life in the Fast Lane: Effects of Early Grade Acceleration on High School and College Outcomes</a>," <em>Gifted Child Quarterly</em>, Vol. 59, No. 1 (January 2015).</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 19:42:19 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58115 at http://edexcellence.netAmerica's Millennials: Overeducated and unpreparedhttp://edexcellence.net/articles/americas-millennials-overeducated-and-unprepared
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>America&#039;s Millennials: Overeducated and unprepared</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/robert-pondiscio">Robert Pondiscio</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 25, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p style="text-align: right;"><img src="http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/14933220305_26fd938f62_k.jpg" style="line-height: 1.538em; width: 100%;" /></p>
<p>The late Don Meredith, beloved color commentator from the glory days of <em>Monday Night Football</em>, liked to break into song when a game hit garbage time, or a big play put the game out of reach. <em>“Turn out the lights!”</em> he would sing in his folksy Texas twang, channeling Willie Nelson. <em>“The party’s over!”</em> Dandy Don’s voice was ringing in my ears as I read a new report from the Educational Testing Service (ETS), <a href="http://www.ets.org/s/research/29836/"><em>America’s Skills Challenge: Millennials and the Future</em></a>. The publication dares to ask out loud how much longer we can thrive as a nation when a vast segment of our society—Americans between sixteen and thirty-four who will be in the workforce for up to fifty more years—“lack the skills required for higher-level employment and meaningful engagement in our democracy.” Seldom have I read a more depressing report.</p>
<p>“Despite having the highest levels of educational attainment of any previous American generation,” writes ETS’s Center for Global Assessment Director Irwin S. Kirch in the report’s preface, “these young adults on average demonstrate relatively weak skills in literacy, numeracy, and problem solving in technology rich environments compared to their international peers.”</p>
<p>In literacy, U.S. millennials outscore only their peers in Italy and Spain among the twenty-two countries in the report. In numeracy, they rank last. Our best-educated millennials—those with a master’s or research degree—are outperformed by the same cohort in every nation other than Ireland, Poland, and Spain. And it’s true no matter how you slice it: Our best-performing compared to their best-performing; our wealthiest vs. their wealthiest; our native-born next to their native-born; our immigrants against theirs. The gap between our own best and worst educated, just for bad measure, is the widest it’s ever been and among the most imbalanced of the countries surveyed.</p>
<p>Most troubling is that our faith in more years of schooling, degrees, credentials, and certificates to produce better outcomes is vividly shown to be misplaced. More time in school is not producing Americans with more or better skills. The people who will work, earn, support families, create jobs, make policy, take leadership positions, and be entrusted generally with protecting, defending, and continuing our democracy are less prepared to do so than any generation in American history.</p>
<p>One of the comforting lies we have told ourselves in recent years is that, while we might have problems, our top performers are still the equal of the best in the world. Alas, the score for U.S. millennials at our ninetieth percentile was statistically higher than the best in just a single country: Spain.</p>
<p>So much for that.</p>
<p>“The comparatively low skill level of U.S. millennials,” write report authors Madeline J. Goodman, Anita M. Sands, and Richard J. Coley, “is likely to test our international competitiveness over the coming decades. If our future rests in part on the skills of this cohort—as these individuals represent the workforce, parents, educators, and our political bedrock—then that future looks bleak.” Uh huh.</p>
<p>I was sitting in a coffee shop as I read and reviewed this report on a snowy New York City afternoon. Overwhelmed, dispirited, eager for distraction, I allowed myself to be dragged briefly into a Twitter “debate” about education reform that instantly devolved into familiar rants about who is or is not qualified to set standards or policy, who’s funding whom, and who stands to make a buck. It was impotent rage: tired, bitter, and utterly pointless. A little like players pushing and shoving during garbage time in a meaningless late-season game. Meanwhile the ETS report at my elbow pitilessly reported what looks more and more like it might stand as the final score.</p>
<p>Somewhere, Dandy Don shakes his head and clears his throat.</p>
<p style="text-align: right;"><span style="font-size: 9px; line-height: 13.8420000076294px; text-align: right;">photo credit: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/merlijnhoek/14933220305/in/photolist-oKAE8B-55zSx-dABigq-55zJW-8qUUew-8qUUeL-8EMrAM-6DFT3v-4X5WGE-6RwKuo-Y1Ew6-5i9Ufq-58EKYk-58EKWZ-58EKQv-58EKMe-58JVtw-58EKJg-58JVr1-61AFr6-4rBAQx-e6J2eT-obC8pt-akEFwS-p89WWa-p8aiah-p8b9F8-p89Vzx-pnC99j-ppCwhm-p89UHT-p8b7LB-p8b7tH-ppCv2q-ppnNKv-p89T1K-ppnMWB-qFfxcq-4f5su6-pnYGm8-8WmpVe-3tiDvT-aNm6mZ-CJzoK-7aT4jN-qv7Dk-5a6538-55NDKD-p8ahsW-pnC71G">Merlijn Hoek</a></span><span style="font-size: 9px; line-height: 13.8420000076294px; text-align: right;"> via <a href="https://www.flickr.com/">Flickr</a></span></p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 19:40:07 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58114 at http://edexcellence.netThe conservative case for H.R. 5http://edexcellence.net/articles/the-conservative-case-for-hr-5
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>The conservative case for H.R. 5</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/chester-e-finn-jr">Chester E. Finn, Jr.</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 24, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The Club for Growth is right about a bunch of issues, but they’re wrong about <a href="http://www.clubforgrowth.org/key-votes/key-vote-alert-no-student-success-act-hr-5/">the pending House bill</a> to replace No Child Left Behind with something far better. <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/scheduling/233777-wednesday-529-plans">H.R. 5</a> (the “Student Success Act”), slated for floor action a few days hence, would, if enacted, be the most conservative federal education move in a quarter century. It has the potential to undo nearly all of the mischievous, dysfunctional, intrusive, big-government features of NCLB and return most education responsibility and authority to states, just as the Tenth Amendment prescribes. Which is, of course, precisely why the bill has come under <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/24/us/more-conflict-over-cutting-federal-role-in-education.html?ref=education&amp;_r=0">sustained attack</a> from the left! If right and left team up to kill it, we’ll be left with No Child Left Behind circa 2002, as modified (and made even more mischievous) by the Education Department’s unilateral “waivers.” </p>
<p>Moreover, states have always had the option—urged yesterday by the Club for Growth as if it were a fresh idea—to “opt completely out of the program.” Any state willing to forego its share of federal education dollars is free to do so—and to exempt itself from all the rules and constraints that accompany those dollars.</p>
<p>States have flirted with this option, and perhaps one will someday actually make such a move, but so far—that means for the last fifty years, inasmuch as NCLB was only the most recent iteration of a 1965 program—none has wanted to decline the money.</p>
<p>Because it’s unlikely that many states ever will, and even less likely that the money will vanish entirely (though H.R. 5 caps and redirects it in ways that <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislative/sap/114/saphr5r_20150225.pdf">the Obama administration is railing against</a>), <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414358/restore-rule-law-education-max-eden-michael-q-mcshane">conservatives should cheer</a> the flexibility and empowerment given back to state leaders by this bill. Then they should focus on the Senate, where Senators Alexander and Murray are trying to craft a bipartisan measure to take to markup in the weeks ahead.</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:54:35 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58107 at http://edexcellence.netNEW from Fordham: Common Core and America's High-Achieving Studentshttp://edexcellence.net/articles/new-from-fordham-common-core-and-americas-high-achieving-students
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>NEW from Fordham: Common Core and America&#039;s High-Achieving Students</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/education-gadfly">The Education Gadfly</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 23, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>While the merit and politics of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) have been much debated and discussed, one topic has been virtually ignored: What do the standards portend for America’s high-ability students? In a new brief from Fordham, Jonathan Plucker, professor of education at the University of Connecticut’s Neag School of Education, provides guidance for districts and schools implementing the Common Core.</p>
<p>1. Common Core is no excuse to ditch gifted services.<br />2. State and local officials should get rid of policies that hurt gifted students and strengthen those that help them.<br />3. Schools should work hard to make differentiation "real."<br />4. Schools should make use of existing high-quality materials that help teachers adapt the Common Core for gifted students.</p>
<p><a href="http://edexcellence.net/publications/common-core-and-americas-high-achieving-students">Download the brief</a>, read “<a href="http://edexcellence.net/articles/can-gifted-education-survive-the-common-core">Can gifted education survive the Common Core?</a><em>” </em>by Chester E. Finn, Jr. and Amber M. Northern, and watch <a href="http://edexcellence.net/events/can-gifted-education-survive-the-common-core">today’s event</a> to learn more.</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Mon, 23 Feb 2015 15:23:45 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58096 at http://edexcellence.netScott Walker doesn't need a college degree—and neither do youhttp://edexcellence.net/articles/scott-walker-doesnt-need-a-college-degree%E2%80%94and-neither-do-you
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>Scott Walker doesn&#039;t need a college degree—and neither do you</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/michael-j-petrilli">Michael J. Petrilli</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 23, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The pundit class is raising questions about whether Scott Walker’s lack of a college degree disqualifies him from being America’s forty-fifth president. This is what educators call a “teachable moment” because the issue goes much deeper than Governor Walker’s biography. Of course a college credential shouldn’t be a prerequisite for the presidency, but that’s also true for many jobs that today require a degree even when it’s not really necessary. That’s a big problem.</p>
<p>Many American leaders are obsessed with college as the path to economic opportunity. President Obama, for instance, wants America to lead the world in college graduates by 2020. But he’s hardly alone. Philanthropists, scholars, business leaders, and other members of the meritocratic elite have been banging the “college for all”—or at least “college for almost all”—drum for the better part of a decade.</p>
<p>Yet despite their own blue-ribbon educations, these leaders are making a classic rookie blunder: They mistake correlation for causation. They point to study after study showing that Americans with college degrees do significantly better on a wide range of indicators: income, marriage, health, happiness, you name it. But they assume that it’s something about college itself that makes all the difference, some alchemy at their alma mater that turns gangly eighteen-year-olds into twentysomething masters of the universe.</p>
<p>Sure, college can be a great experience, and many individuals gain <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/27/the-tuition-is-too-damn-high-part-ii-why-college-is-still-worth-it/">important knowledge, skills, insights, and contacts</a> there. It’s also a prerequisite for most graduate and professional schools. All of that can help to build the “human capital” that enables people to get good-paying jobs and then excel at them.</p>
<p>But much of the college advantage can be explained by “selection bias”—the differences between those who tend to complete college and those who don’t. The dirty little secret of college is that it tends to bestow a credential on those who are already most likely to succeed. To use another term from Statistics 101, “confounding variables” explain why college grads do better: Their reading and math abilities; their social skills; their wealth. If people with these underlying advantages did something with their time other than go to college, like start a business or serve in the military, they would still outperform their peers over the long term.</p>
<p>Furthermore, research tells us how college students do “on average” against their peers without degrees. But those averages can mask a lot of variation. As Andrew Kelly succinctly put it in a recent paper for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, “on average ≠ always.” He cites a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York that found that the lowest-paid quartile of college graduates earns little more than average high-school graduates do; that’s been so since the 1970s. Which helps to explain all of those college-educated Starbucks baristas. </p>
<p>Back to Governor Walker. Our challenge as his prospective employer isn’t to determine whether presidents “on average” do better with a college degree than without one. It’s to consider Walker’s particular case. Does he have the knowledge and skills to do the job? What’s his track record in similar positions? We might conclude that his executive experience and legislative skills are quite solid but that his foreign-policy knowledge is a bit of a question mark. That’s the case with various successful GOP governors who are running for president. What matters isn’t whether they finished college thirty or forty years ago, but how they’ve been performing in recent years, what kinds of advisers they are associating with, and what that implies for their potential success as president.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, millions of Americans don’t have this same opportunity to make their case to prospective employers, because their lack of a degree locks them out of the recruitment process altogether. While there are indeed some jobs that require the knowledge and skills gained in college, surely receptionists and photographers are not among them. Employers use college degrees as a proxy for smarts, perseverance, and other valuable skills. But this shortcut unwittingly excludes many talented people from their prospective hiring pool. This is especially unfair since people who come from modest means (such as Walker) are most likely to be disadvantaged by this type of credentialism. As Charles Murray has argued persuasively, a much better system would be one in which employers “rely more on direct evidence about what the job candidate knows, less on where it was learned or how long it took.”</p>
<p>Scott Walker may or may not be the best candidate for president. But there’s little doubt that he should be in the candidate pool. The same goes for millions of his non-college-educated peers who want a shot at a good job. We should give them a chance.</p>
<p><em>Editor's note: This post <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414133/scott-walker-doesnt-need-degree-and-neither-do-you-michael-j-petrilli">appeared last week in a slightly different form</a> at</em> National Review Online.</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Mon, 23 Feb 2015 14:42:18 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58094 at http://edexcellence.netFive ideas to strengthen the No Child Left Behind reauthorization proposalshttp://edexcellence.net/articles/five-ideas-to-strengthen-the-no-child-left-behind-reauthorization-proposals
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>Five ideas to strengthen the No Child Left Behind reauthorization proposals</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/michael-brickman.html">Michael Brickman</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 19, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>For the first time since No Child Left Behind became law in 2002, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) stands a real chance to be reauthorized by Congress. It’s been at least seven years since it was supposed to be re-upped, and it’s overdue for some changes.</p>
<p>Most encouragingly, the Republican bills introduced to date seem to be designed to strike a balance between promoting parental, local, and state empowerment while also being pragmatic enough to stand a chance of becoming law. They’re still far from the finish line and could be made even stronger in the process. That said, they are a worthy effort and have the potential to improve the federal role in education policy dramatically.</p>
<p><strong><u>Two chambers, two proposals</u></strong></p>
<p>House education committee Chairman John Kline’s job is easier because his Student Success Act (SSA) passed out of the full House once before (in July 2013, on a party-line vote), and he can’t be blocked by a Democratic filibuster. He’s already marked up the SSA and plans to send it to the floor and pass it out of the House again in short order.</p>
<p>Senator Alexander, on the other hand, must cobble together a sixty-vote majority if he wants to send a bill to conference committee. He started the journey when he released his Every Student Ready for College or Career Act of 2015, an update of his reauthorization proposal from 2013, in early January. Since then, his HELP committee has held three hearings, and his staff just announced his intention to work on a bipartisan bill with Ranking Member Patty Murray in coming weeks. Both chairmen have indicated a desire to move these bills quickly (and Rep. Kline has acted particularly quickly).</p>
<p><strong><u>How could they be improved?</u></strong></p>
<p>From Fordham’s perspective, there is a lot to like in the bills. Passing nearly any bill would be beneficial at this point because it would remove the uncertainty and federal overreach of the waiver era. In addition, the bills’ major steps in the direction of federalism, while maintaining some of the key transparency provisions of No Child Left Behind, are welcomed and also could put to rest some of the lingering concerns over the power of the education secretary to push states into adopting standards and tests (something he or she should not have the power to do, no matter how good those standards and tests are).</p>
<p>Still, there are some things that might make these proposals even stronger:</p>
<p style="margin-left:40px;"><strong>1.</strong> Though these proposals give a nod to competency-based education, there are still potential issues related to the testing of high-achieving students. Currently they are required to take grade-level tests, which might not accurately assess their true achievement and may diminish incentives for schools to take their growth seriously.</p>
<p style="margin-left:40px;">One potential solution, presented by Senator Al Franken a few years back, would be to leave no doubt as to whether states are allowed to use computer-adaptive testing to find out exactly where students stand (they almost certainly can, but this would make doubly sure).</p>
<p style="margin-left:40px;">Another idea would be to allow a defined (small) percentage of the most gifted children to take an alternative assessment—be it the same test at a different grade level or a different test altogether. This might also represent somewhat of a compromise on the aforementioned issue of testing flexibility should Congress decide to keep annual testing. </p>
<p style="margin-left:40px;"><strong>2. </strong>There has been <a href="http://edexcellence.net/articles/school-discipline-too-important-to-leave-to-liberals">outcry</a> of late over the administration’s use of quotas to discipline schools who are suspending “too many” children overall or “too many” children within individual subgroups. Certainly these are issues that need to be looked at, but not through the use of one-size-fits-all prescriptions from Washington. A prohibition on this practice, as well as the deletion of any recommendation that states use discipline rates in their school report cards (which can create perverse incentives for teachers to not suspend even very disruptive students), would be welcome.</p>
<p style="margin-left:40px;"><strong>3.</strong> Chairman Kline’s bill limits the use of Title II funds to reduce class sizes so that funds can be freed up for reforms that have a better track record of improving student outcomes. It’s an idea worthy of Chairman Alexander’s consideration.</p>
<p style="margin-left:40px;"><strong>4.</strong> It would be nice to see some additional flexibility within the law to account for, or even encourage, the use of course-based school choice programs, including course access and education savings accounts.</p>
<p style="margin-left:40px;"><strong>5.</strong> There is some disagreement on which of the <a href="http://dailysignal.com/2015/02/12/no-program-left-behind/">dozens of small federal programs</a> should be kept, eliminated, or rolled into the larger funding pools. Each deserves discussion but, all things being equal, committee leaders should focus on getting rid of ineffective programs and granting states maximum flexibility on the use of funds.</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Thu, 19 Feb 2015 19:27:48 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58089 at http://edexcellence.netEd Trust Midwest report on Michigan's charter authorizers: A decent start, but hardly the final wordhttp://edexcellence.net/articles/ed-trust-midwest-report-on-michigans-charter-authorizers-a-decent-start-but-hardly-the
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h1>Ed Trust Midwest report on Michigan&#039;s charter authorizers: A decent start, but hardly the final word</h1></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-article-related-staff field-type-entityreference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/about-us/fordham-staff/michael-j-petrilli">Michael J. Petrilli</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-post-date field-type-ds field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">February 19, 2015</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Followers of Fordham’s work know that we are obsessed with charter school quality, both nationally and in our home state of Ohio. We are also a charter school authorizer, responsible for overseeing a portfolio of eleven schools in the Buckeye State—a job we take very seriously.</p>
<p>So when we learned that our colleagues at Ed Trust Midwest were giving charter quality—and especially authorizer quality—a hard look in our neighboring state of Michigan, we took notice.</p>
<p>Its new report, <a href="http://midwest.edtrust.org/resource/accountability-for-all/"><em>Accountability for All: The Need for Real Charter School Authorizer Accountability in Michigan</em></a>, is an important contribution. It rightfully focuses on authorizers as the lynchpin of charter quality; they are, after all, the entities that screen and approve new charter schools and then hold them accountable for results (or—as is sometimes the case—do not).</p>
<p>And the group’s ranking of Michigan’s charter school authorizers—based on the test scores of the schools they oversee—is a good conversation starter. (Among big authorizers [thirty-plus schools], four get Bs, one gets a C, and one gets a D.)</p>
<p>Still, I have some quibbles. First, I can’t quite tell if Ed Trust Midwest calculated schools’ growth scores appropriately. The methodology says that schools’ growth was compared to “the average student growth of the state and the local school district where most of its students live.” That doesn’t sound as precise as CREDO’s methodology, which compares each student’s growth to a “virtual twin”—a more robust way of controlling for demographic differences.</p>
<p>That matters because, according to CREDO’s <a href="http://credo.stanford.edu/pdfs/MI_report_2012_FINAL_1_11_2013_no_watermark.pdf">most recent report</a>, Michigan charter students are, by and large, outpacing their public school peers. Ed Trust Midwest might ask CREDO to revisit its 2013 Michigan-specific study and break out charters’ growth scores by authorizer. It did <a href="http://edexcellence.net/publications/charter-school-performance-in-ohio">such an analysis in Ohio</a>, and the results were instructive. It might show, for example, that authorizers like Central Michigan University (a C authorizer by Ed Trust’s lights) are simply approving more schools in high-poverty areas than are other entities. More accurate growth measures would be a fairer way to disentangle performance from demographics.</p>
<p>But that’s not the entirety of my concerns. As with any accountability system, we shouldn’t rely on test scores alone. Here too Michigan might learn from its neighbor to the south. The Ohio Department of Education has spent the better part of two years building a very robust “<a href="http://edexcellence.net/articles/the-rating-system-at-the-heart-of-kasich%E2%80%99s-charter-school-reforms">Quality Sponsor Practices Review</a>”—an evaluation tool for charter school authorizers that combines quantitative data like student achievement results with inspectorate-type information as well. Now Governor John Kasich wants to use the QSPR to put Ohio’s worst charter authorizers out of business and incentivize charter schools to sign up with the stronger ones.</p>
<p>Charter school quality, authorizer quality, and authorizer accountability are all great topics of conversation for policymakers in Michigan. The Ed Trust Midwest report should be seen as the beginning—but not the end—of those discussions.</p>
</div></div></div><ul class="links inline"><li class="comment_forbidden first last"></li>
</ul>Thu, 19 Feb 2015 18:57:23 +0000kmahnken@edexcellence.net58088 at http://edexcellence.net